Invictus

Have you ever seen a film that you felt should have been a shoe in for the Oscars and didn;t win squat?

Did you think that a winner of the Oscar was a pile of steaming crap?

Do you think the Oscars mean anything?

Dr. Giganto

The Oscars sucked early this decade when they were dominated by pretentious artsy films that nobody actually saw.

if I recall Pulp Fiction didnt win jack, but thats just because it was released the same year as Forrest Gump.

The Half Boy

Shawshank Redemption. That film should have swept the board, but was just lost in the shuffle. The Oscars are a bag of wank. I only like awards that are voted for by the public, not arthouse crapsters who only like a film because of its inventive use of lighting or some such baloney.

Tomorrow's Just An Excuse Away,
So I Pull My Collar Up And Face The Cold, On My Own.
The Earth Laughs Beneath My Heavy Feet,
At The Blasphemy In My Old Jangly Walk.

DMW

I like the Oscars for the most part. It's a bit pretentious, but they generally do a good job imo.

I agree it was dissappointing that Shawshank Redemption didn't win anything, but it was more dissappointing that Pulp Fiction lost out.

Reilly

Well the Oscars are like the only awards I have some respect for, but they are a bit like Fred Durst, totally mainstream but trying to give the effect that they're left field (Thats the last time I mention Limp Bizkit I swear).

This results in some pretty random pickings on movies. Sometimes its all just bullshit, especially the last couple years. I thought giving Johnny Depp the nomination for his role in hugely popular Pirates of the Carribean kinda shows that they're not afraid to credit big actors and movies (LOTR was just obvious okay).

I hope Kill Bill picks up some next year.

Give it time

Invictus

In all fairness if you look at the 1995 Oscars out of Forest Gump, Shawshank and Pulp Fiction for Best Picture, I Think they took the right film.

While I love Shawshank, I think that overall Gump is much better film for story and for acting. No one could have played that role like Hanks and he throughly deserved his oscar IMO.

I hate QT films, especially Pulp Fiction. I see nothing original or interesting about, maybe I just don;t get it.

Shawshank on any other year would have swept the boards but it was released at the same time as a purely outstanding film that wasn't going to be beaten.

I also think it suffered because it was an adaptation of a story and not an original screenplay.

Could have been worse though Four Weddings and a Funeral could have won, god knows why that was nominated.

DMW

The Oscars have gotten into a bad habit of effectively giving retro-active oscars. They keep giving out oscars to people, not because their performance deserved it, but because people feel he/she deserved it by now. Lord of the Rings and Denzel Washington's best actor award being examples.

Invictus

LOTRs should not have even got near an Oscar, while they may be good films in there own right, there a glorified Harry Potter at best sometimes. Really slow story, some really hammy acting, not at all Best Picture.

Another dodgy decision, Chicago, BEST PICTURE!!!!!!!! WTF?

I can see why Denzel won the Oscar for Training Day because theother nominees were acted off thescreen by him. Sean Penn in I am Sam was nothing special, Russell Crowe pissed off the Academy threateing the BAFTA TV presenters and a Beautiful Mind was crap anyway, Ali was a dreadful film which anyone who can say I am the Greatest for 3 hours could have played lead and Jim Broadbent was ok in in the bedroom but again nothing compared the DW.

Creature of the Night

Having The English Patient sweep the boards at an Oscar ceremony really made me get vexed.

I thought Denzel was amazing in Training Day and thorougly deserved his Oscar.